Just where do we stand?

[Dedicated Dad]

Guess again. Have you seen the growth in home schooling in this country? Might it have something to do with the abandonment of education and the promotion of social engineering including a big push on incorporating homosexual "awareness" into all areas of the cirriculum. Bump to that!BTW does the DC have anything to do with the District?

 

 

[YoungBlood]

Hey everyone,

 

I am new to the board. I am 18 years old and a Freshman at the University of Delaware. I earned my Eagle Scout when I was 16. My dad also post on this board, his username is Rooster7. I would leave BSA if they allowed the entry of gays to the organization. In case you are wondering what posseses an 18 year old college student to find time to post on a web board about scouting. It is simple I am a political science major and very passionate about things such as scouting. I look forward to posting more on this board.

[OldGreyEagle]

Welcome YoungBlood

 

Always glad to have another perspective on board.

 

I have to tell you I respect your father for his devotion and passion to both scouts and his faith.

 

And as you probably know or will see, he and I dont always agree on issues, but I would be proud to call him a friend.

[Dedicated Dad]

Welcome Rooster Jr. I can already tell Im going to like you.

[cjmiam]

Welcome aboard YoungBlood!

 

Looking forward to hearing more from you.

 

Congratulations on your Eagle!

 

 

[Weekender]

Youngblood (Rooster7 Jr., RJ, Rooster8), (just pullin your leg), Glad to have you aboard. As has been said already, your dad is well respected around here...I think even by those who don't always agree with him.

 

DC, You nailed it. Social engineering is one of the top reasons we are now homeschooling, poor educational standards and safety are two other big ones. I don't find public schools to be an acceptable environment for children anymore.

[Rooster7]

Thanks for giving my son a warm welcome.

 

OGE, despite our sometimes heated exchanges, I find you to be pretty affable. By the way, I realize that DD has a rather blunt debating style, that doesn't always goes well with you, but my guess isyou'd probably find him to be a good friend too.

 

My son is pretty conservative. I'm not sure we agree on everything, but it's probably close to it. I feel his presence gives me an unfair advantage (another supporter to echo my conservative sentiments). Regardless, he speaks his own mind.

 

Now I will have to be even more watchful of my postings

 

[Pioneer DC]

BTW does the DC have anything to do with the District

District Commissioner. Also, working on setting up a targeted program within our Council for home schoolers.

[NJCubScouter]

I am brand new to this forum. I have been posting on America Online but the Scouting forum there is underpopulated these days.

 

I am an Assistant Cubmaster from New Jersey, was a Life Scout, and am now happily married for 20 years, with 3 children. I have known a number of gay people, and have been friends with some and have worked with others. I see no reason why being gay makes someone unsuitable to be a Scout leader. They simply have a different orientation, and I do not see that as being immoral. Therefore, they can be just as good a role model for the values contained in the Scout Oath and Law (to paraphrase the BSA) as anyone else. I understand the strong feelings on both sides of this issue, and for that reason I think the right solution would be for the BSA to allow each chartering organization to decide on the policy for their units. Please remember, that as strongly as some people may believe that homosexuality is immoral, others (including me) believe just as strongly that discrimination against gays is immoral. There should be room for both views in an organization that claimed, at least when I was a boy, to be "for all boys."

 

Now, I realize that the specific subject of this thread is the poll I just voted in. Having read all the previous posts, it seems pretty irrelevant that 74 percent say they would leave Scouting, because I am fairly sure that most of that 74 percent are not currently in Scouting anyway. You can't leave someplace you aren't. Obviously I voted that I would stay; the issue for me has been whether I would stay under the present circumstances. I am staying for the benefit of my son and his fellow Cubs, in hopes that the BSA will see the light. Scouting is still a good program and is a good way for an adult to provide community service (which I guess is an outmoded concept these days.) Whether I "cross over" to a troop when my son does so in about a year, remains to be seen.

[Dedicated Dad]

They simply have a different orientation, and I do not see that as being immoral. Those who practice incest and bestiality simply have a different orientation too, you cant logically justify they are any less moral in their sexuality than those who practice homosexuality.

[Bob Russell]

NJCubScouter, welcome to the board, and thank you for your involvement in scouting. I hope you continue, as well as your son, into Boy Scouts. I believe that you will find many dedicated scouters that share your views. Your son when looking at Boy Scout troops needs to consider his comfort level with the policies and views of other members of the troop.

 

DD, I disagree with your comparing bestiality and incest with homosexuality. As you know from reading my posts, I disagree with your views toward homosexuality. I do not believe that homosexual relationships are automatically wrong, anymore than I believe all heterosexual relationships are right. And I am sure that you agree that all heterosexual relationships are not right - you already mentioned incest, and most people agree that a relationship between a 45-year old man and a 12-year old girl is wrong today, although I am sure that historically this was once looked at differently - but morals can in fact change over time. However, I respect your viewpoint, and do not view you as immoral or "meanspirited" (I hate the use of that term) for holding your views. I believe that well-intentioned people can disagree. I would rather have committed relationships of homosexual couples accepted. Instead, let's object to harmful relationships and sexual practices. Of course I would include your examples of bestiality and incest, and include general irresponsibility such as mate swapping, swinging, etc. I would rather allow gays/lesbians to marry, and encourage such committed relationships, so that the gay/lesbian community can then object to the immoral portions of their communities, the bath houses and in-your-face shows of sexuality, etc.

 

 

[Pioneer DC]

Bob Russell: I would have to disagree with you in your remarks to Dedicated Dad. Homosexuality is inherently a dangerous lifestyle and all the talk about loving, committed partners is just a smokescreen. I'm sure there are some, but the fact remains that most homosexuals have many sexual partners and tend towards ever increasing bizarre sexual activities such as bondage and sadism to keep the thrill going. Homosexuals have, as a group, shorter lifespans than heterosexuals because of this lifestyle. It is not just an alternative lifestyle - that is the propaganda that is spewed constantly. It is obviously working from examining some of the posts here. Here's another one: ten percent of the population is homosexual - true or false? This is another one of the big lies that keeps getting repeated over and over. Although this claim has been long discredited, that doesn't stop the homosexual agenda from continuing to repeat it in attempts to gain legitimacy. Originally published in Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948, this study has been shown to have been heavily weighted by choosing subjects from known populations with higher than normal homosexual orientations, such as the prision population. But let us not let mere facts get in the way of promoting the agenda, after all.

Want to read more about the agenda? Try reading After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. This is basically the blueprint for gaining acceptance for homosexual culture in this country. This book was published in 1989 and it is scary to look back and see how much of it agenda is being used to turn people's opinions. Some might even say...Orwellian.

[featherswillfly]

MY my my the things we find to discuss. You know I wouldn't want to cast a vote as to what whether I would stay or leave. It seems it wouldn't really make a difference. You could piss people off either way. But I will say to any and all who are listening, you should try a poll in the prisons and see just how many of the so called perverts are homosexuals you might be surprised. A very large percentage of todays perverts are straight men or men who traditionally prefer women. I myself am a survivor from one of these perverts and he was NOT homosexual. There are many homosexuals who would not dream of touching a child. But there are many many so called straight people who prey on our children. Take away a persons sexual preference. Judge him on his actions alone.

[Pioneer DC]

My point was this: there is a very specific agenda out there and facts are not allowed to get in the way of it. No one said that there are not bad apples among any group.

The Kinsey study that spawned the ten percent myth was based on obviously flawed data. Don't forget, the Kinsey study was done in 1948 and at least six studies since then (1970 - 1994) have shown the homosexual portion of the population to be in the two to three percent range on a pretty consistent basis. Yet, the homosexual lobby persists in telling everyone that ten percent of the population is homosexual. The Los Angeles School District recommends, among other books for its students, a book called One Teenager in Ten, a book that clearly continues the Big Lie.

So why am I bringing all this up? Because there is clearly an agenda out there and the homosexual issue is only part of it. It has to do with destroying our values and principles through incrementalism. To illustrate this, see The Humanist Manifesto 2000 by Paul Kurtz. This is a successor to The Humanist Manifesto and The Humanist Manifesto II which were published in 1933 and 1973, respectively. It is all right there for anyone with eyes to see.

Why don't these people who want to change the Boy Scouts to include avowed homosexuals and atheists go off and form their own organizations? The answer is simple. The goal is not to have an all inclusive group, it is to break down the Scouts morals and values and replace them with moral relativism. The true goal of the humanists is to destroy what the Scouts stand for. Character Counts, On My Honor and Timeless Values are abhorrent to these people.

Do not be deluded. All these groups that preach tolerance are not themselves tolerant of any other position but their own.

[Bob Russell]

Pioneer, if you read my post carefully, you may discover that there are many areas that we do not disagree. First, you point out that statistically, homosexuls lead a more dangerous lifestyle. Do I disagree, no. But my post was to the effect that if we recognize those homosexuals that lead a "normal" lifestyle, and I believe that to be many more than you recognize, the gay community can differentiate the mainstream from the fringe. If you want to only look at averages, you marginalize many fine people. Say we look at African-Americans - by percentages, are young black males more likely to commit crimes? Are black females more likely to have children out of wedlock? The answer is yes, so do we condemn all blacks? Of course not. I read an article many years ago comparing married and unmarried males. After looking at the statistics such as drug use, criminal records, life expectancy, etc., the article concluded by asking, based upon the poor image of unmarried vs. married males, would you ever want your daughter to marry an unmarried man? In other words, be careful with statistics.

 

I do not disagree with your statistics regarding the % of homosexuals in the population. And I agree that the gay rights lobby can often be vicious. I consider the gay rights lobby to be a "take no prisoners" lobby, and I do not support the fringe. I said myself that the fringe lobby cares not for scouting but only for its agenda. Again, if you carefully read my post, we do not disagree on much of what has been said. However, all people should be looked at as individuals, and I personally know, like and respect too many gays to allow a knee-jerk reaction against them. I will continue to support inclusion of gays/lesbians in scouting, if the particular individuals want to participate for the right reasons. But the same is true for heterosexuals, I want only those who are here for the right reasons.